Skip to content
TORNLIFE More

Christian Nihilism, Death to the World, and the Apocalypse: An Essay.

Started by Mike0xl0ng [3630403] on in Art & Literature.

3 replies · 6 views · thread synced · 3 days ago · View on torn.com
About this thread

Posts archived: 4 / 4 posts (100%) · the total is Torn's reply count + the opening post at the last fetch

Counted by TornLife from the archived posts.

Archived posts
4
Discussion span
→
People posting
3
Likes on archived posts
4
Authority score
7 / 100
Historical score
9 / 100
Story score
29 / 100
Engagement score
49 / 100
Mike0xl0ng [3630403]

Christian Nihilism, Death to the World, and the Apocalypse 

 


There is a profound contradiction at the heart of modern life. Humanity possesses unprecedented technological power, comfort, entertainment and access to information, yet many people experience an increasing sense that life itself lacks meaning. We have become extraordinarily capable of answering the question of how to do things while becoming increasingly uncertain about why anything should matter in the first place.

It is this problem that lies at the centre of the Orthodox Christian critique of nihilism associated particularly with Fr. Seraphim Rose. For Rose, nihilism was not simply the philosophical belief that nothing exists or that life has no meaning. It was a spiritual condition: the gradual removal of God, objective truth and transcendent purpose from human existence. His argument was that when man attempts to construct meaning independently of God, the result is ultimately instability, because every supposedly absolute value becomes dependent upon human preference.

This provides an important connection between Rose's writings, the phrase “Death to the World,” and the apocalyptic vision of the Book of Revelation.

Nihilism and the loss of meaning
Nihilism can be understood in its simplest form as the denial that existence possesses any inherent meaning, purpose or objective value. There are many different philosophical forms of nihilism, and Rose's use of the term was broader and more theological than a strict philosophical definition.

Rose believed that modern man was increasingly attempting to live as though God did not exist. The consequence, in his view, was not genuine freedom but spiritual emptiness. If there is no transcendent source of truth, then morality becomes increasingly subjective. If there is no eternal destiny, then death becomes the final destruction of everything a person values. If there is no God, then the human person can ultimately be reduced to biology, economics, politics, psychology or material processes.

This is why Rose regarded nihilism as more than an intellectual theory. It was a worldview capable of reshaping an entire civilisation.

His concern was particularly focused on the question of death. If human existence ultimately ends in oblivion, then even love, sacrifice, courage and goodness can appear to have no permanent significance. Rose's writings explicitly connected the problem of meaning with the question of whether humanity survives death.

Christianity offers a radically different answer.
The Christian claim is not that death is an illusion. Christianity takes death with extraordinary seriousness. Death is the enemy precisely because human beings were created for communion with God and eternal life. Orthodox teaching therefore understands death as a consequence of humanity's fallen condition rather than God's original intention for creation.

The Christian answer to nihilism is therefore not simply to invent a more optimistic philosophy. It is the claim that Christ has defeated death itself.

“Death to the World”
This brings us to the seemingly severe phrase “Death to the World.”

Taken literally and without its Christian context, the phrase can sound like hatred of the physical world or even a rejection of human life. That is not its traditional Orthodox meaning.

In Orthodox Christianity, “the world” can mean something quite different from God's creation. Scripture can use world to describe the system of passions, pride, vanity and rebellion against God. One Orthodox explanation of the phrase notes that Christians are called not to despise God's creation but to reject the spirit of the world when it places created things above their Creator.

Consequently, to die to the world is to die to the domination of the world over the human heart.

It means becoming dead to the pursuit of status for its own sake, to greed, vanity, lust, pride, resentment, endless entertainment and the desire for approval. It means refusing to allow the values of one's surrounding culture to become one's ultimate values.

This is why Death to the World describes the Christian life as a kind of rebellion. The movement, inspired by Fr. Seraphim Rose and the monastic tradition associated with St. Herman of Alaska Monastery, presents Christianity as an alternative to a culture increasingly defined by materialism, consumerism and nihilism. Its own motto captures the paradox:

“Die so that when you die you will not die.”

The Christian is therefore called to experience a kind of death before physical death: death to the false self, death to sinful passions and death to the idea that earthly existence is the highest reality.

But this death is ultimately directed toward life.
Christianity does not say, “Destroy yourself because existence is meaningless.”

It says almost the opposite:

Die to what is killing you so that you may live.

The Cross as the answer to nihilism
The centre of this worldview is the Cross.

The Cross is perhaps the ultimate Christian paradox. From an ordinary human perspective, Christ's crucifixion appears to be defeat. The innocent man is humiliated, tortured and killed. His disciples scatter. His movement appears to have collapsed.

Yet Christianity declares that this apparent defeat is actually victory.

The Orthodox tradition expresses this through the proclamation that Christ trampled down death by death. According to Orthodox theology, Christ enters into the very reality that humanity fears most—suffering, death and the grave—and transforms it from within.

This is fundamentally different from nihilism.
Nihilism says that death ultimately renders existence meaningless.

Christianity says that Christ enters death and destroys its finality.

Therefore, the Christian does not need to pretend that suffering is pleasant or that death is insignificant. Christianity can acknowledge the horror of suffering while simultaneously maintaining hope that suffering and death do not have the final word.

Revelation and the collapse of the old world
This brings us naturally to the Book of Revelation.

The word Apocalypse comes from the Greek apokalypsis, meaning an unveiling or revelation. The book traditionally attributed to the Apostle John was written to Christians experiencing persecution and presents a series of extraordinary visions concerning the struggle between God, evil, the powers of the world and the ultimate establishment of God's Kingdom.
Revelation is often approached as a coded prediction of specific modern events. But the Orthodox Church has traditionally cautioned against simply assigning every symbol to a particular contemporary person, government or historical event. The Orthodox Church in America explicitly warns against interpreting the book by reducing its visions to specific historical events and individuals while ignoring their symbolic significance.

The deeper message is therefore more enduring.


The Beast represents political and worldly power when it sets itself against God. Babylon represents a civilisation intoxicated by wealth, luxury and corruption. The faithful are called to remain loyal to Christ even when the surrounding culture demands conformity.

The question Revelation ultimately poses is not merely:

“Can you identify the Antichrist?”

It is:

“Whom will you worship?”

That is a much more uncomfortable question.

Babylon and the modern world
One of Revelation's most powerful images is Babylon.

Babylon is presented as magnificent, wealthy and seductive, yet spiritually corrupt. She represents a civilisation that has become consumed by luxury, commerce, power and the exploitation of others.

This is where Revelation intersects particularly strongly with the critique of modern nihilism.

A society does not have to explicitly proclaim atheism in order to become spiritually nihilistic.

It can continue using religious language while functionally treating money, pleasure, status, sexuality, political power, entertainment or technological progress as ultimate goods.

The danger is not merely that people stop believing in God. The deeper danger is that something else takes God's place.

The modern person can therefore become religious about almost anything.

Politics can become religion.

Sexual identity can become religion.

Consumerism can become religion.

Nationalism can become religion.

Celebrity can become religion.

Even technology can become religion.
Each can promise salvation, identity or transcendence, yet none can ultimately defeat death.

Revelation presents this problem through the contrast between Babylon and the New Jerusalem.

Babylon represents the great civilisation of fallen humanity.

The New Jerusalem represents the restoration of creation in communion with God.

The New Jerusalem
The final chapters of Revelation are therefore essential to understanding the Christian meaning of the Apocalypse.

Revelation does not end with humanity escaping creation and abandoning the material world. It ends with the coming of the New Jerusalem, the renewal of creation and the dwelling of God with humanity.

This is crucial.

Christianity is not ultimately teaching:

“The physical world is bad; escape it.”

It is teaching:

“The fallen order will be transformed.”

The Christian hope is resurrection, not permanent disembodiment.

The final Christian vision is therefore not annihilation but restoration: death is defeated, corruption is overcome, and humanity is reunited with God.

This is why “death to the world” cannot properly mean hatred of creation. The Christian is called to die to the fallen way of living in the world precisely because God intends to redeem creation.

The last true rebellion
From this perspective, the Christian life can be understood as a rebellion—but not primarily a political rebellion.

It is rebellion against nihilism.

It is rebellion against the idea that human beings are merely biological accidents.

It is rebellion against the idea that pleasure is the highest good.

It is rebellion against the belief that death has the final word.

It is rebellion against the demand to conform one's conscience completely to whatever happens to be fashionable or socially dominant.
And ultimately, it is rebellion against the worship of the created world instead of the Creator.

This explains why Death to the World has appealed particularly strongly to people who feel alienated from modern culture. Its message is deliberately confrontational: you do not have to accept the world's definition of what makes a successful human being.

But there is an important danger here as well.
A Christian rejection of the world can itself become corrupted into hatred of other people. The purpose of dying to the world is not to develop contempt for one's neighbours, nor to imagine oneself spiritually superior to everyone else. The Christian tradition insists that the struggle is fundamentally against sin, pride and the passions within oneself.

The most authentic Christian rebellion therefore begins internally.

Before condemning Babylon, the Christian must recognise Babylon's temptations within his own heart.

Conclusion
Fr. Seraphim Rose's critique of nihilism, the Orthodox concept of dying to the world, and the Apocalypse of St. John can be understood as three parts of the same spiritual argument.

Nihilism says: nothing ultimately means anything.

The world says: meaning can be found in wealth, pleasure, power, identity, recognition and material existence.

Christianity says: none of these things can save you from death.

And Revelation takes the argument to its ultimate conclusion: the kingdoms of this world are temporary, while the Kingdom of God is eternal.

The Christian response is therefore neither despair nor blind optimism.

It is repentance, resistance and hope.

Repentance, because the Christian recognises that the values of the fallen world can take root within his own heart.

Resistance, because the Christian refuses to make temporary things into eternal gods.

And hope, because Christianity ultimately rests upon the claim that death itself has been defeated through Christ.

“Death to the World” therefore does not mean death to existence. It means death to the illusion that the present fallen order is all that exists.

The Christian dies to the world because he believes there is another world coming.

And the final image of Revelation is not a meaningless universe collapsing into darkness, but God dwelling with humanity, death being overcome, and creation being made new.

The Apocalypse is therefore not ultimately a story about the end of hope.

It is a story about the end of nihilism.

 

 

 

Jarakos [1970421]

that was way too long man.   religious conflict leads to death. until you can solve this you cannot say religion is definitely a net positive for humanity.  atheism will lead to increased suicide.  but there is no reason to think the suicides will ever outpace the deaths of religious conflict.

souls and the afterlife are made up.  everyone's super cool consciousness that they believe to be the greatest thing since sliced bread; is the sum of your conscious and subconscious processing power in that marvelous brain you carry around.  nothing more.

God is not real.

 

see how short this was bro?

Your word of the day is Concise:
Concise means expressing much in few words, or being short, clear, and straight to the point without extra or unnecessary details

Also what use is all that religious meaning to your life if it is all lies, illusion and nonsense?

Sure maybe it's the greatest story ever told, but it's a story, and lots of make believe besides.  don't overthink it.  eternal paradise seems too good to be true, because it always has been.

 

You can base treating other humans well and all other morality by a simple non-religious fact:
Life is precious because everyone only gets one.  Because you only get one life, quality of life is also important.  As quality of life is important, you should treat others well.

 

No pixie dust or angel wings required.  If you want to question why life is precious if it has no greater meaning; I get that this is a big question. 

Not all big questions need to be answered for you to live life as best you can.  

 

If you asked wise men the answer to all life's questions, they should say; "Those are good questions, I do not know."    But "I Don't Know," satisfies no one.  So instead we have all the made-up hogwash of every people on the planet making up their own gods.  From Odin, to Vishnu, to Lugus, to Zeus, to Jupiter, to Perun, to Marduk, to Amun-Ra.

And some of those stories are great, lots of great morals blended into them.  But all made up.

 

Hades ain't real, nor Valhalla, nor Diyu, nor Yomi, nor Duat, nor Mictlan, nor Heaven or Hell.  make believe my friend.

Dubdoll [2086447]

You can base treating other humans well and all other morality by a simple non-religious fact

 

The original post isn't really arguing whether religion is a net positive or negative for humanity. It's more exploring nihilism and the Christian answer to it. Where meaning comes from, What happens when material existence becomes the highest good.., and how Christianity looks at suffering, death and meaning.

 

Your response seems to be coming from the position that God isn't real, there is no afterlife.. and that we don't need religion in order to have morals. That's a different argument from what I understood the original post to be making. And I actually agree that you don't need religion to be a good person or treat people well, but I don't think that really answers what the original post was getting at; If we're ultimately temporary beings in a purely material universe, is the meaning we create for ourselves enough, or does genuine meaning require something beyond ourselves?

 

I also don't know if religious conflict alone is enough to say religion can't be a net positive. People have managed to kill each other over race, land, politics, power, resources and pretty much everything else too..

Jarakos [1970421]

I honestly had trouble having the patience to get through the original post.  

Personally as I am coming at it from the perspective of an atheist, to me the interesting part of the discussion starts at how we can have morality outside of religion. 

After trying to read through the original post again, I also tried to express that: "Not all big questions need to be answered for you to live life as best you can."  In a general answer to how subjective meaning or morality can be good enough.  

All the long drawn out sections on religion to me are just noise.  For humanity to ever rid ourselves of the noise, I think people need to on occasion voice how nonsensical and irrational it is.

I concede we can't say religion wasn't a net positive in humanity's shaping and earlier eras.  I just hope humanity grows out of it.  If morality outside of religion can gain traction and acceptance, and community with others can be handled in other ways, then we can leave religion behind us.